Remaking I-81 in Syracuse
bcub...@gmail.com
chop down the elevated expressway of I-81 through downtown. Here's a
roundup of reactions so far:
http://blog.syracuse.com/kirst/2007/12/rebuild_or_remove_rethinking_8.html
Any thoughts from the experts here?
Froggie
> There's a lot of debate in Syracuse, NY, right now about whether to
> chop down the elevated expressway of I-81 through downtown. Here's a
> roundup of reactions so far:
>
>
> Any thoughts from the experts here?
There's valid points from those who say the viaduct has created blight
underneath and is a pedestrian nightmare. But at the same time, that
is a very real through-traffic and to/from downtown traffic stream
that isn't going to go away. A tunnel or depressed freeway has
benefits that far outweigh an elevated route. Though it will cost $$$$
$ to get it done, NYSDOT should seriously consider depressing or
tunneling both 81 and 690.
Another thing to consider: if DestinyUSA takes off, traffic will
increase even more. And 690 can't handle the load if 81 is removed.
Froggie | Syracuse "regular" from '03-'05... | http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/
Free Lunch
bcub...@gmail.com wrote in
<7aaa6859-8e1c-4536...@s27g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
The best (through town, not riverbank) urban freeway that I have seen is
Philly's Vine Street Expressway. It has a very sensibly small impact of
space and sound on the city while still managing to deliver a tolerable
amount of capacity. I know little about Syracuse, but I cannot see how
an elevated expressway can be good for it or even necessary. If it has
to be replaced and a freeway needs to go through the area, a depressed
freeway would be my first choice.
GuyP...@gmail.com
> There's a lot of debate in Syracuse, NY, right now about whether to
> chop down the elevated expressway of I-81 through downtown. Here's a
> roundup of reactions so far:
>
>
> Any thoughts from the experts here?
The only way that *removing* the elevated I-81 from downtown Syracuse
could be made remotely acceptable, from a traffic POV, would be to
construct the SW segment of I-481 (or whatever it would be numbered).
Guy Olsen, PE(NJ), PTOE
Scott M. Kozel
>
> The best (through town, not riverbank) urban freeway that I have seen is
> Philly's Vine Street Expressway. It has a very sensibly small impact of
> space and sound on the city while still managing to deliver a tolerable
> amount of capacity.
I question whether the amount of capacity is "tolerable", as most of it
is only 4 lanes (2 each way), which is very small for a crosstown
freeway in a city the size of Philadelphia. The original plan was for
6 lanes (3 each way) throughout.
The original Vine Street had 10 lanes on 4 separate roadways east of
16th Street, and the depressed freeway was built on the location of the
inner roadways.
> I know little about Syracuse, but I cannot see how
> an elevated expressway can be good for it or even necessary. If it has
> to be replaced and a freeway needs to go through the area, a depressed
> freeway would be my first choice.
How many lanes does this segment of I-81 have?
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
Froggie
> > I know little about Syracuse, but I cannot see how
> > an elevated expressway can be good for it or even necessary. If it has
> > to be replaced and a freeway needs to go through the area, a depressed
> > freeway would be my first choice.
>
> How many lanes does this segment of I-81 have?
4 through lanes on the viaduct itself, plus auxiliary lanes on either
end feeding outward (to I-690 to the north and to I-481 to the south).
One problem I've long noted: at the north end of the viaduct,
southbound I-81 only has one continuous through lane. But even with
that issue, traffic flows fairly well throughout the day...only during
morning rush hour is there anything I'd consider congestion, and in
that southbound direction the congestion is north of the viaduct
instead of on the viaduct itself.
Froggie | Syracuse road veteran... | http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/
Free Lunch
"Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@comcast.net> wrote in
<4777117A...@comcast.net>:
>Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>
>> The best (through town, not riverbank) urban freeway that I have seen is
>> Philly's Vine Street Expressway. It has a very sensibly small impact of
>> space and sound on the city while still managing to deliver a tolerable
>> amount of capacity.
>
>I question whether the amount of capacity is "tolerable", as most of it
>is only 4 lanes (2 each way), which is very small for a crosstown
>freeway in a city the size of Philadelphia. The original plan was for
>6 lanes (3 each way) throughout.
I agree that three through lanes each direction are needed on Vine.
necromancer
> There's valid points from those who say the viaduct has created blight
> underneath and is a pedestrian nightmare. But at the same time, that
> is a very real through-traffic and to/from downtown traffic stream
> that isn't going to go away. A tunnel or depressed freeway has
> benefits that far outweigh an elevated route. Though it will cost $$$$
> $ to get it done, NYSDOT should seriously consider depressing or
> tunneling both 81 and 690.
I would settle for just making decent interchanges on IH81 and IH690 so
you aren't having to do wierd maneuvers on surface streets to get from
one road to the other. (i.e. to get from the airport to NY5 and the
western suburbs, you have to take IH81 S to the Carusel Mall exit, make
your way to Bear St to get to IH690W to NY695 to NY5)
> Another thing to consider: if DestinyUSA takes off, traffic will
> increase even more. And 690 can't handle the load if 81 is removed.
When I was up there last July, My relations were telling me about
Destiny and all the steel I-beams that were sitting in stacks along
Hiawatha Bl. They took me past them to and from the airport and there
were these signs that said, "some see steel, we see jobs." (I'll have to
dig into my archives and see if I have any pics of that and from under
the viaduct that makes up IH81) I was like, "I see a huge asset sitting
there gathering rust and not generating any revenue." Looking at the
grandiose plans that they have for Destiny, I have to wonder who was
smoking what to come up with that idea (they apparently have never seen
a Syracuse winter) and where I can get my hands on some.
--
"What do you call someone who has been in a coma for 6 years?
Mr. President"
--Jay Leno, 8/3/07
Free Lunch
necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> wrote in
<MPG.21e0fa5b6...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>:
How much did DestinyUSA get Syracuse and New York State to kick in for
this?
Bobby H
First, I'm no "expert," but having lived in metro Syracuse (Liverpool
actually) during the early 1980s when I was just a kid I do have
opinions on the area and its highways.
It almost goes without saying that completely removing I-81 from
downtown Syracuse would be a very stupid choice. I don't know where the
political energy is coming from on lobbying for the removal of I-81 to
"unite downtown." Perhaps it's a few Utopian pie in the sky dreamers on
the Syracuse University campus hoping the I-81 ROW gets converted into
parkland and bike paths for their own use.
Unfortunately, there's a fairly good chance that elevated chunk of I-81
could be removed and not replaced.
The elevated freeway is OLD. I don't know when it was built, but it
didn't look new when I lived in the area and that was over 25 years ago.
If it isn't already a major maintenance and safety issue headache the
old elevated highway is guaranteed to become one very soon.
A serious traffic bottleneck occurs when I-81 goes elevated and crosses
Burt Street. It's reduced from 6 lanes to 4. There's lots of businesses,
apartment buildings, parking lots, billboards and more built right up
next to the road. That leaves little room for expansion.
An obvious solution would be building a new highway in a trench or
creating a cut and cover tunnel. I think either solution should feature
at least 4 lanes in each direction. The problem is you can't build such
a think underneath that existing elevated structure. Long distance
traffic would have to be diverted onto I-481 for a number of years while
that old segment of I-81 is demolished, removed and then rebuilt. The
problem is that once the old I-81 is removed, anti roads people would
see an opening to block any new road construction with all sorts of stunts.
I-40 in downtown Oklahoma City is getting rebuilt on a new alignment.
Downtown Syracuse doesn't offer the same option. The Syracuse University
Campus and Oakwood-Morningside Cemetary use much of the land immediately
East of the highway. There is densely packed residential homes and
apartments transitioning into office buildings and office towers to the
West. Any new I-81 rebuild would have to happen in the same location.
This situation in Syracuse has me thinking of other similar aging
elevated steel highway structures in other cities. I shudder to think
just how daunting a task it will be when the time comes to rebuild the
Brooklyn-Queens Expressway. Talk about nightmare projects! Yeesh!
Scott M. Kozel
>
> "Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >I question whether the amount of capacity is "tolerable", as most of it
> >is only 4 lanes (2 each way), which is very small for a crosstown
> >freeway in a city the size of Philadelphia. The original plan was for
> >6 lanes (3 each way) throughout.
>
> I agree that three through lanes each direction are needed on Vine.
The highway is depressed with high retaining walls, so they pretty much
locked in the current width, as it would be extremely expensive to widen
the highway.
C Curley
could be made remotely acceptable, from a traffic POV, would be to
construct the SW segment of I-481 (or whatever it would be numbered).
Onondaga Hill is a big barrier in building a freeway around SW Syracuse. If
you were to do it, it would have to be built starting at Lafayette or
further south because the Onondaga Indian Nation sits between Lafayette and
Syracuse and there is no way that they will allow a freeway though their
territory. The costs of dealing with the hills alone would be very
expensive.
The other problem is where would it end west of Syracuse? The eastern end
of the NY 5 Camillus bypass was supposed to be extended south of W Genesee
St in Fairmount where it ends now but I don't see a freeway being plowed
through neighborhoods in the towns of Geddes and Onondaga, or through the
city of Syracuse, to meet up with the current intersection of 481 being
approved either. It could meet up with the western end of the Camillus
bypass, or continue to the Thruway but that isn't any better than taking 481
to 690 and coming back across town IMO.
The last point is that it is a very pleasant scenic drive coming into
Syracuse from the south and southwest. There is no development on 81 south
of Syracuse and the reason is that the Onondaga Nation has been a buffer
from all of that. That is why all the development on 81 went north. It is
a very pretty drive on NY 175 from Syracuse, once you get out of the city,
to Marcellus and Skaneateles. There is some development on Onondaga Hill
where 173 and 175 meet but it's nothing like what would come if a freeway
was built out there. I was stunned the last time I was up there (2005) to
see that the historic Onondaga Town Hall was demolished so that Velasko Rd
and Makyes Rd could meet at NY 175 at a single point for a traffic light.
There are a lot of new houses up there but I didn't notice any commercial
development. My dad grew up on Onondaga Hill and I had family that lived up
there from 1955 to 1997.
I can't see building a southwest bypass only because of 81 being removed
from downtown and there aren't enough people out that way to justify it
either. I don't see any easy answer to fixing 81 though downtown Syracuse.
Chris
ccurley100atcarolinadotrrdotcom
necromancer
> The last point is that it is a very pleasant scenic drive coming into
> Syracuse from the south and southwest. There is no development on 81 south
> of Syracuse and the reason is that the Onondaga Nation has been a buffer
> from all of that. That is why all the development on 81 went north. It is
> a very pretty drive on NY 175 from Syracuse, once you get out of the city,
> to Marcellus and Skaneateles.
I'll second that. Particularly in the Marcellus and Skaneatlas areas.
Next time I'm up that way, there will be alot of road geek videos for me
to make.
> There is some development on Onondaga Hill
> where 173 and 175 meet but it's nothing like what would come if a freeway
> was built out there. I was stunned the last time I was up there (2005) to
> see that the historic Onondaga Town Hall was demolished so that Velasko Rd
> and Makyes Rd could meet at NY 175 at a single point for a traffic light.
> There are a lot of new houses up there but I didn't notice any commercial
> development. My dad grew up on Onondaga Hill and I had family that lived up
> there from 1955 to 1997.
A lot of that area is starting to develop. Much like the Sterling area
here in Glynn COunty, GA (about 10 miles NW of Brunswick, GA) is
building up. And just like with Sterling, I can't imagine who is buying
these houses and where they ae getting their money from....
> I can't see building a southwest bypass only because of 81 being removed
> from downtown and there aren't enough people out that way to justify it
> either. I don't see any easy answer to fixing 81 though downtown Syracuse.
About the only solution I see that would not involve a lot of demolition
of surrounding buildings and a lot of time and money would be to extend
the current IH481 from the Thruway north back to IH81, re-designate that
as IH81 (funneling the through traffic going to/from Canada around the
city) and demolish the viaduct through downtown, leaving two spurs off
IH81 (say, IH381 from the south and IH581 from the north) to take local
traffic into the city. Though I doubt that the powers that be running
DestiNY would go for that idea.
--
"This town needs an enema!"
--The Joker
Nathan Perry
necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> wrote:
> About the only solution I see that would not involve a lot of demolition
> of surrounding buildings and a lot of time and money would be to extend
> the current IH481 from the Thruway north back to IH81...
What extension is necessary? I-481 already runs north from the Thruway
to I-81 (and beyond, as NY 481).
necromancer
It sure is. My mistake.
--
necromancer
Deadly Psychopath. And Proud of it, Man!!
Revive755
> bcubbi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > There's a lot of debate in Syracuse, NY, right now about whether to
> > chop down the elevated expressway of I-81 through downtown. Here's a
> > roundup of reactions so far:
>
>
> > Any thoughts from the experts here?
>
> First, I'm no "expert," but having lived in metro Syracuse (Liverpool
> actually) during the early 1980s when I was just a kid I do have
> opinions on the area and its highways.
I'm not an expert on life and traffic in Syracuse either, but from a
map of the city, it appears that Syracuse lacks decent north-south
arterials to handle through traffic.
> It almost goes without saying that completely removing I-81 from
> downtown Syracuse would be a very stupid choice. I don't know where the
> political energy is coming from on lobbying for the removal of I-81 to
> "unite downtown." Perhaps it's a few Utopian pie in the sky dreamers on
> the Syracuse University campus hoping the I-81 ROW gets converted into
> parkland and bike paths for their own use.
Probably the same type of out of touch with reality dreamers that
think removing I-70 between the PSB and a new Mississippi River bridge
in St. Louis would be a great idea.
ericwi...@yahoo.com
regulators, judges and media outlets that have tied themselves in
knots about replacing the Peace Bridge, replacing the Tappan Zee
Bridge, widening 287 (oops, I mean never widening 287), etc. are
running this process, then the elevated section of I-81 will stand in
its present form as long as the pyramids at Luxor have stood (or until
the road finally falls down due to neglect). .
figrin d'an
Just kidding. Happy New Year, everyone.
J.P. Wing
<55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> said:
> Nathan Perry:
>> In article <MPG.21e1c39fb...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>,
>> necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> wrote:
>>
>>> About the only solution I see that would not involve a lot of demolition
>>> of surrounding buildings and a lot of time and money would be to extend
>>> the current IH481 from the Thruway north back to IH81...
>>
>> What extension is necessary? I-481 already runs north from the Thruway
>> to I-81 (and beyond, as NY 481).
>
> It sure is. My mistake.
Plus, northbound traffic approaching the southern Interstate 481
interchange on I-81 is encouraged to take I-481 as a bypass around
Syracuse. The control city for 481 NORTH is DeWitt, I think it should
also include Watertown/Canada.
Currently the two signs say "Syracuse Area Exits 17-28" and "Bypass for
Thru Traffic use (481) NORTH". Personally, I think it should say "To
Bypass Downtown Syracuse use (481) NORTH". I think "Bypass for Thru
Traffic" might be a little too much like traffic engineer-speak.
J.P. Wing
Rothman
> There's a lot of debate in Syracuse, NY, right now about whether to
> chop down the elevated expressway of I-81 through downtown. Here's a
> roundup of reactions so far:
>
>
> Any thoughts from the experts here?
In my personal experience, ripping down the viaduct appears to
currently be the choice with the most momentum.
mrcowc...@hotmail.com
Due to the onondagas, topography, the expensive housing on onondaga
hill, and the land originally bought by NY for the SW link was sold to
developers and businesses, that section of 481 will never be built.
Putting 81 in a trench is not cost effective or a good idea.
Groundwater is relatively high (the city was built on a swamp) so a
series of pumps would have to be installed to keep pumping out the
groundwater and any other precipitation (rain, snow, etc.) This region
uses a lot of salt so the pumps would have to be maintained quite
frequently ($$$$$$$).. also with more and more stringent water quality
regulations, the water would have to be "treated" before being sent
out to Onondaga Lake which in itself is a being put under the
political and environmental microscope.
Most of the folks advocating the removal of I 81 downtown know little
or nothing about highways or use common sense.
Trenching the road would also cause problems with existing
interchanges with other boulevards and I-690. That could mean the
taking of additional properties.. some historic, and who wants to do
that?
Did I mention that this would unecessarily be very expensive?? So pays
for such ideas? Well, the folks here are already complaining about
taxes and the high cost of fuel anyway.
So what's the answer?
In order to justify the project, the existing portion should be
replaced with a more modern pre-cast design. Incentives to take I-481
may be necessary if you Toll the I-81 segment (High Occupancy Toll)
south of I-690 to I481. This gives people the incentive to carpool,
use hybrids, and/or motorcycles and reduce the cueing up University
Hill. Plus that reduces the amount of emissions therefore improving
air quality. Vehicles heading North then West would take I-481, go
through a "Free Zone" on the Thruway since all the booths would be
removed between interchanges 39 and 34A. High Speed Open Road Tolling
would be set up West and East of those interchanges. This also allows
for a free flow of traffic between I-90 and the rest of the
interchanges (once again, safer exiting and entering, plus better air
quality)
Forcing traffic from one side of the city to the other and putting
other citizens at risk is foolish and iresponsible, but those ideas
are coming mostly from politicos and "self appointed princes and
pincesses of the city" who usually if not always lack a shred of
common sense.
Big Daddy B-Rock
Changing grades is a ridiculously huge undertaking. Look at the Big
Dig. Plus, with water table problems and a lot of precipitation, it
gets even worse.
As far as viaducts being pedestrian unfriendly, I think that's a
terrible assertion. What other type of road would have continuous
access across? That's not even a big viaduct, so it shouldn't be
scary. We have some 10 lane ones in the Bay Area and that's a slightly
more valid gripe then.
This sounds like the people who advocate removing the Alaskan Way
Viaduct in Seattle and replacing it with a street. Yes, it worked on
the Embarcadero in SF as well as the Central Fwy (sort of). The reason
it worked is that neither of those connected to anything.
George Conklin
<mrcowc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41f90dcf-688e-4c81...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Just like advocting toll roads to raise costs to the public, right? Are
you a libertarian too?
Capwa...@gmail.com
>
> Just like advocting toll roads to raise costs to the public, right? Are
>
> - Show quoted text -
Actually, it's not a matter of being a libertarian or not.. I'd rather
see the highway be replaced by a more modern structure. However, every
project costs money, so if you want to dedicate funds to a particular
segment, then a toll, or an incentive not to pay a toll (reduce
traffic carpooling or alternative routing) would pay for it. Now, if
you want to go the "old fashioned" way and pay through fuel taxes or
some other revenue, fine.. but it is still going to cost you no matter
what you do.
George Conklin
<Capwa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fdb112fd-0122-442c...@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
-----
Given the economic mess upstate NY faces, further discouraging people from
moving there or locating jobs there, what is the point?